In the past, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was vocally critical of nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran, famously delivering a virulent address to Congress that challenged the Obama administration’s efforts to secure an agreement. As talks for a fresh deal recommence, Netanyahu’s response is markedly silent.
Despite perceiving a nuclear-armed Iran as a grave threat to Israel’s existence, Netanyahu appears constrained, primarily due to a favorable relationship with former U.S. President Donald Trump. His reluctance to publicly disapprove of a deal lies in Trump’s supportive stance towards Israel and his notoriously volatile reaction to criticism.
“Netanyahu feels bound by Trump. He’s immobilized,” pointed out Yoel Guzansky, an Iran specialist at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv. Over the last year and a half, Israel has significantly strengthened its strategic stance in the Middle East by effectively dealing with Iranian allies in Lebanon, Gaza, and Syria. Israel has also taken direct action against Iran, weakening some of its air defense systems, thus opening a temporary window to possibly strike Iran’s nuclear infrastructure without significant regional repercussions.
However, Netanyahu has been unable to rally Trump to prioritize a military approach against Iran, a tactic that would rely heavily on U.S. support. With ongoing negotiations, Israel lacks the legitimacy to unilaterally initiate military action.
“Netanyahu is in a bind,” noted Eytan Gilboa, an expert on U.S.-Israel relations at Bar-Ilan University. “He was hoping that Israel would gain a stronger position relative to Iran under Trump, but the reality proved contrary.”
Meanwhile, Netanyahu and his nationalist allies had anticipated Trump’s presidency as a potential ally for a more aggressive stance on Iran, especially envisaging support for a military strike on its nuclear facilities. Nonetheless, Trump’s policies revealed complexities that didn’t fully align with Netanyahu’s visions.
Historically, Netanyahu has emphasized the danger of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, rallying globally against the deal brokered under the Obama administration. He asserts that the pact was ineffective in curbing Iran’s nuclear potential and insists that Israel, the only nuclear power in the Middle East, must retain this advantage.
Under Netanyahu’s encouragement, Trump previously withdrew from the Obama-era accord. Since his return to office, Trump has allowed Israel substantial maneuverability in its military actions against adversaries like Hamas and the Houthi rebels, yet maintains a preference for diplomatic negotiations with Iran.
Netanyahu is cautious not to risk his rapport with Trump by outright opposing U.S-Iran negotiations, especially given how the two leaders’ relations strained following Netanyahu’s earlier congratulations to Joe Biden on his presidential victory. Israeli officials have communicated their conditions for any agreement to Washington, acknowledging that if action were required during talks, Israel would have to act independently.
Netanyahu’s aspirations focus on a stringent deal akin to Libya’s 2003 agreement, which demanded dismantlement of nuclear sites and granted unrestricted access to inspectors, though uncertainties remain about Trump’s willingness to impose such conditions, given Iran’s resistance.
Trump has emphasized diplomacy while not excluding military measures, with ongoing tactical discussions aiming to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons. Iran maintains its program is peaceful but hints at weaponizing capabilities.
Since Trump voided the original 2018 agreement, Iran has upped its nuclear enrichment activities. Netanyahu’s past efforts to challenge Obama’s deal included a speech to Congress without White House consultation, exacerbating partisan tensions and diminishing traditional bipartisan support for Israel.
As talks progress, Netanyahu may face challenges critiquing any new agreement if finalized. Even within his party, few might openly challenge Trump, leaving Netanyahu dependent on far-right allies to voice criticisms.
Until then, as Gilboa suggests, Netanyahu’s optimal scenario remains that further negotiations with Iran reach an impasse. “That, for him, would be the best outcome.”